CA Rescue Group Adopts Dog Then Steals Him from Adopter

blinky

Blinky, as shown on the NBCbayarea.com website.

A rescue scenario many of us can relate to:

A woman fell in love with a dog she met at a CA adoption event in early September.  She filled out an application, answering all questions truthfully, including that she had a full time job and no other pets.  She was approved, paid the $300 fee and took the dog home.  She renamed him, considering him part of her family now.  She bought him chew toys and doggie clothes in addition to knitting him a sweater herself.  She promised to protect him for the rest of his life.

Sound familiar?  I have been in those shoes.  But then:

After 3 weeks with her new family member, representatives from the rescue group came by the woman’s home.  They informed the adopter that her truthful answers on her adoption application were disqualifying.  The dog required someone to stay at home with him every day and he required other pets to play with.  His new name was unacceptable, as was the fact that the woman allowed him to snooze on the couch.  The woman was stunned.  One of the reps asked if she could hold the dog and the owner agreed.  The rescue reps then ran from the home, carrying the woman’s pet with them.

The woman is heartbroken and told a local reporter she loves her dog Blinky with all her “heart and soul”.  She feels she failed him.

HALO, the rescue group that stole Blinky from his owner, said this when contacted by the media:

“We are taking this matter very seriously but just need to follow the proper channels before we can make a public statement. Please allow us our time to do our due diligence. The adopters check was never cashed and returned to her immediately.”

I have searched for news updates on this story but haven’t found any. I have also found what appear to be a website and a Facebook page for the rescue group but neither had any information on Blinky. If anyone knows what happened to Blinky, please post a comment.

Stories such as this, while they are the exception and not the rule, happen far too frequently.  They discourage adoption and turn the public off rescuing.  When pet lovers are driven away from adoption, they get their pets from other sources – usually those which rescues like to shame people for using.  If you don’t like the effect, stop contributing to the cause.

Human beings are fallible.  I hope in this case, the HALO reps realize they were the ones who were at fault, not the owner, and do the right thing to get Blinky home.

(Thanks Clarice.)

Save

Save

Next Post
Leave a comment

12 Comments

  1. Donna Lake

     /  November 25, 2016

    OMG, Please give update on this story. This is just not right. She was honest and loyal to her new Blinky, At least she works and he is INSIDE, Not out freezing like a lot of poor furbabies do. GIVE HER BACK BLINKY YOU HEARTLESS ASSOLES……….

    Reply
  2. loranc

     /  November 25, 2016

    What?? If this is the group I know of as Halo they do mostly cats. And show at the Petco a couple of miles from me. AND I know one of the organizers!! I’m stunned but now I’m going to email her and find out if this is her group. This is ridiculous.

    Reply
  3. This is obviously a legal issue & I hope both sides let their attorneys sort this out through mediation or in court if necessary. At issue is an important principle — is the adoption a form of sale or is it a “conditional gift,” meaning that if certain conditions are not satisfied the agreement is voided & the animal must be returned? NC has decided that it is a conditional gift — not sure rescuers understand the legal basis & what powers & responsibilities this entails. What conditions are reasonable? Who decides? What due process requirements must be satisfied?
    Rescue law is heating up. Thinking of starting something called “The Rescuers’ Gazette.” Do you think anyone would read it?

    Reply
  4. Alice

     /  November 26, 2016

    Not an update, but I know a few details that were left out of the media.

    One of the women who stole Blinky was his foster mother. She was obsessed with him, no one would be good enough. How he got to the rescue event without her, I don’t know. But apparently she flipped when she found out he had been adopted out.

    Backing up a little bit, Blinky came into HALO with two eyes. It was on this foster’s watch that he got some sort of briars in his eye that lead to it having to be removed. So she isn’t perfect herself.

    HALO removed their reviews and visitor comments. That’s all they had to “say” about Blinky. They’re just burying their head and wishing this to go away. But their “justification” is they hadn’t cashed the check they were given for Blinky. So the adoption hadn’t really taken place.

    Reply
  5. davydsmith

     /  November 26, 2016

    No Kill Learning just published this recently. Very related. Why do we, as rescuers, make it so difficult for people to help us save lives? http://www.nokilllearning.net/single-post/2016/11/25/If-You-Have-a-Problem-With-This-You-May-Be-Part-of-the-Problem

    Reply
  6. Linda Bailey

     /  November 26, 2016

    She needs to call the police and file charges for theft.

    Reply
  7. In every field of endeavor, there are some people who are not wired to spec. Maybe I am overexposed to examples because of the circles I travel in, but it seems that animal rescue and sheltering has way more than its share of them.

    Reply
  8. JEANNE

     /  November 26, 2016

    Alice, really? Proving you don’t have foxtail in your yard? Then they should only adopt dogs to people who live in the Mojave. I have 5 dogs, a somewhat landscaped yard, and as hard as I work at it, the foxtails keep finding a way in. I suppose I could concrete my entire yard but that’s not environmental, earth friendly, or pet friendly.
    Pets can get foxtails. Even the best of people may have the arch enemy, sinful, anti-christ, horrible foxtail in their yard sometimes. It does not make someone a bad pet owner. Please stop making the terms “animal rescue” and “animal activist” synonymous with “crazy”, or”emotionally unstable”.

    Reply
  9. This is absolutely insane. They stole her dog because “The dog required someone to stay at home with him every day”? So, only people without jobs can adopt from this “rescue”? And his NAME is not acceptable to the rescue?? The other excuses for stealing this woman’s dog are equally insane (along with a $300 adoption fee).

    And this is an example of why people still go to breeders instead of adopting from rescues. Obviously, some have utterly ludicrous criteria. These are the people that are supposed to be saving animals from kill shelters. How can they do that if no one could possibly qualify to adopt?

    I hope the woman sues. They stole her dog. I’m sure any rational judge would agree.

    Reply
  10. Ken Wolterman

     /  November 26, 2016

    I was denied by a rescue because I had a doggie door so I can relate

    Reply
  11. Kittypurr

     /  December 5, 2016

    So this Rescue has a nut job for a foster parent who thinks she can go into a persons home and steal back a dog she allowed to be harmed while in her care.
    The rescue needs to get its head out of its butt and realize that their business is about to get whalloped with a law suit. Step up to the plate- get the dog back from the “foster” and hand it over to the adopter. And tell the foster to take a hike. Seems to me the rescue doesn’t know how to run a business and is letting their volunteers do whatever they like including theft.

    Reply

Speak!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: